[ieee 2013 learning and teaching in computing and enginering (latice) - macau (2013.3.21-2013.3.24)]...

4
Instructor Scaffolding and Students’ Critical Thinking through Asynchronous Online Discussion Forum Siti Nazleen Abdul Rabu Centre for Instructional Technology and Multimedia Universiti Sains Malaysia Penang, Malaysia [email protected] Baharuddin Aris Faculty of Education Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Skudai, Johor, Malaysia [email protected] Zaidatun Tasir Faculty of Education Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Skudai, Johor, Malaysia [email protected] AbstractThe purpose of this study is to investigate the potential impact of instructor scaffolding types on students’ critical thinking engagement, cognitive performance and general critical thinking skills. This study will be carried out in ten weeks and will involve 38 undergraduate students that enrolled in CD-ROM Based Multimedia Development course. The independent variable of this study is the instructor scaffolding types while three assessment techniques namely the students’ critical thinking engagement, cognitive performance and general critical thinking skills are the dependent variables. This study seeks to identify the dominant type of instructor scaffolding through AODF in order to further determine which type of the instructor scaffolds that might optimize students’ cognitive outcomes. This kind of investigation could identify any correlation between the students’ quality of postings exhibited in the AODF and the students’ performance in the subject-specific cognitive performance test and general critical thinking test. This study is an exploratory study that adopts a quantitative approach, specifically utilizing the one-group pre-test post-test design with the triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data. The findings of this study may further instructor's understanding of different students’ need in a problem-solving scenario task activities discussion via the AODF, thus help them to better support the students towards more advanced forms of critical thinking. Keywords—scaffolding; critical thinking; Asynchronous Online Discussion Forum (AODF) I. PROBLEM STATEMENT Asynchronous Online Discussion Forum (AODF) which is commonly available in the typical Learning Management System (LMS) such as Moodle, Blackboard and WebCT is now one of the most widely used e-learning tools to support online learning in higher education [1] [2]. AODF provides a perfect platform for instructors to explore their usage in order to enhance the learners educational experience and promoting learning in the online environments. The ultimate goal of the AODF is to achieve high levels of learning. Recently, it has been suggested that AODF is increasingly used to develop students’ critical thinking skills. It is believed that students are able to think critically on the subject content and have more time to structure and organize their thoughts before asking questions or making statements in this kind of platform. Therefore, students are expected to make high level cognitive contributions rather than just rote memorization of content [3][4]. Thus, the use of AODF is becoming critical in online learning. Since the inculcation of critical thinking is highly encouraged to be embedded in teaching and learning, [3] [4][5] suggest that critical thinking skills could be taught through AODF. Furthermore, from the educational technology perspective, emphasis on fostering students' critical thinking through AODF is encouraging as the extension or supplementary method through gradual infusion and immersion of teaching critical thinking in the embedded method perspective. AODF appears to be an interesting new approach to teach critical thinking because it combines the best of writing exercises and online discussions. However, as argued by [6][7] even though the quality of participation and dialogue exhibited by the students in this platform has been one of the major concerns of many researchers, AODF effects on students’ learning and critical thinking have not yet been well investigated due to the limited empirical evidence. Based on various studies by researchers [8][9], they proposed that critical thinking can be seen as being in the domain of tacit knowledge of an instructor as the subject matter expert. Critical thinking is often inculcated through the expert’s communication. The delivery of the instructor’s expertise in a form of critical thinking skills to their students can occur indirectly through the question and answer session in the AODF environment. This question and answer session between instructor,as an expert and students, as novices might trigger the expert’s critical thinking to be revealed. In addition, AODF platform will allow the expert’s expertise and quality of thinking to be transformed and internalized by students. 2013 Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering 978-0-7695-4960-6/13 $26.00 © 2013 IEEE DOI 10.1109/LaTiCE.2013.24 216 2013 Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering 978-0-7695-4960-6/13 $26.00 © 2013 IEEE DOI 10.1109/LaTiCE.2013.24 216

Upload: z

Post on 02-Mar-2017

214 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Instructor Scaffolding and Students’ Critical Thinking through Asynchronous Online Discussion Forum

Siti Nazleen Abdul Rabu Centre for Instructional Technology and Multimedia

Universiti Sains Malaysia Penang, Malaysia

[email protected]

Baharuddin Aris Faculty of Education

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

[email protected]

Zaidatun Tasir Faculty of Education

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

[email protected]

Abstract— The purpose of this study is to investigate the potential impact of instructor scaffolding types on students’ critical thinking engagement, cognitive performance and general critical thinking skills. This study will be carried out in ten weeks and will involve 38 undergraduate students that enrolled in CD-ROM Based Multimedia Development course. The independent variable of this study is the instructor scaffolding types while three assessment techniques namely the students’ critical thinking engagement, cognitive performance and general critical thinking skills are the dependent variables. This study seeks to identify the dominant type of instructor scaffolding through AODF in order to further determine which type of the instructor scaffolds that might optimize students’ cognitive outcomes. This kind of investigation could identify any correlation between the students’ quality of postings exhibited in the AODF and the students’ performance in the subject-specific cognitive performance test and general critical thinking test. This study is an exploratory study that adopts a quantitative approach, specifically utilizing the one-group pre-test post-test design with the triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data. The findings of this study may further instructor's understanding of different students’ need in a problem-solving scenario task activities discussion via the AODF, thus help them to better support the students towards more advanced forms of critical thinking.

Keywords—scaffolding; critical thinking; Asynchronous Online Discussion Forum (AODF)

I. PROBLEM STATEMENT Asynchronous Online Discussion Forum (AODF)

which is commonly available in the typical Learning Management System (LMS) such as Moodle, Blackboard and WebCT is now one of the most widely used e-learning tools to support online learning in higher education [1] [2]. AODF provides a perfect platform for instructors to explore their usage in order to enhance the learners educational experience and promoting learning in the online environments. The ultimate goal of the AODF is to achieve high levels of learning. Recently, it has been suggested that AODF is increasingly used to develop students’ critical

thinking skills. It is believed that students are able to think critically on the subject content and have more time to structure and organize their thoughts before asking questions or making statements in this kind of platform. Therefore, students are expected to make high level cognitive contributions rather than just rote memorization of content [3][4]. Thus, the use of AODF is becoming critical in online learning.

Since the inculcation of critical thinking is highly encouraged to be embedded in teaching and learning, [3] [4][5] suggest that critical thinking skills could be taught through AODF. Furthermore, from the educational technology perspective, emphasis on fostering students' critical thinking through AODF is encouraging as the extension or supplementary method through gradual infusion and immersion of teaching critical thinking in the embedded method perspective. AODF appears to be an interesting new approach to teach critical thinking because it combines the best of writing exercises and online discussions. However, as argued by [6][7] even though the quality of participation and dialogue exhibited by the students in this platform has been one of the major concerns of many researchers, AODF effects on students’ learning and critical thinking have not yet been well investigated due to the limited empirical evidence.

Based on various studies by researchers [8][9], they proposed that critical thinking can be seen as being in the domain of tacit knowledge of an instructor as the subject matter expert. Critical thinking is often inculcated through the expert’s communication. The delivery of the instructor’s expertise in a form of critical thinking skills to their students can occur indirectly through the question and answer session in the AODF environment. This question and answer session between instructor,as an expert and students, as novices might trigger the expert’s critical thinking to be revealed. In addition, AODF platform will allow the expert’s expertise and quality of thinking to be transformed and internalized by students.

2013 Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering

978-0-7695-4960-6/13 $26.00 © 2013 IEEE

DOI 10.1109/LaTiCE.2013.24

216

2013 Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering

978-0-7695-4960-6/13 $26.00 © 2013 IEEE

DOI 10.1109/LaTiCE.2013.24

216

However, the problem of low critical thinking engagement in AODF has been much discussed and reported in recent literature. Generally, studies consistently revealed that the proportion of the posting messages in the AODF platform indicating critical thinking engagement were rather low which doesn’t lead to critical thinking [10]. They argued that students failed to engage in deep conversation and provide thoughtful and reflective contributions related to the discussion requirement. Hence, [8] claimed that AODF has not been sufficiently and productively implemented in the LMS because the instructors and students were only interested and involved in the teaching and learning for mastery instead of higher order thinking skills.

One of the variables that researchers tend to associate with critical thinking is scaffolding as the facilitator or instructor role. Many researchers highlighted the possible importance of instructor scaffolding in influencing participation and critical thinking in problem-based scenario tasks in AODF environment [11][12][1]. They pointed out that instructors’ demonstration of their own thinking through the scaffolding processes is important in immersing students in critical thinking and encouraging students verbalizing their critical thinking in the teaching and learning process. Unfortunately, although a variety of scaffolds have been developed and implemented, there is a lack of research on the design and implementation of scaffolds to support critical thinking development, specifically in AODF environment [13]. The current state of scaffolding as an instructor role currently applied through AODF platform are still abstract and general. Based on the previous research findings that reported guidelines for online instructional design and practices have been suggested, but strategies for instructor scaffolding in online learning are not specified [14], it is learned that the frequency, intensity and quality of the instructor’s scaffolding in AODF and its effects on student critical thinking engagement is not well addressed in the literature [15]. Moreover, the existing body of research is obviously too small and very few published studies could be located to provide strong theoretical and practical grounding on which type or types of scaffolding that were most effective, how much scaffolding is required and how to foster critical thinking through instructor scaffolding [14]. Thus, more researches need to be conducted to validate the relationship between the instructor scaffolding and students’ critical thinking which has not yet been thoroughly investigated.

Various researches have been conducted to measure students’ critical thinking engagement in the AODF explicitly as the dependent variable. However, very few of them investigate the instructor scaffolding as the independent variable. Hardly we can see study that examined 3 different dimensions of critical thinking measurement which involve critical thinking engagement in the AODF and the transfer towards subject-specific critical thinking and general critical thinking simultaneously in order to assess an individual‘s abilities in using different cognitive skills in critical thinking.

This study believes that the instructor scaffolding via the AODF environment has a direct effect towards these three different dimensions of critical thinking assessment. This study argues that a true measurement of critical thinking development would need to examine individual thinking across different dimension of critical thinking measurement, not only the measurement of critical thinking engagement via the AODF alone but including the development and transfer across subject-specific critical thinking and general critical thinking. This is important in order to investigate whether the students’ manifestation of critical thinking as evidence in the AODF platform also reflect their subject-specific and general critical thinking skills.

Therefore, this study seeks to identify the dominant type of instructor scaffolding received by each student through the AODF in order to further determine which type of the instructor scaffold that might optimize students’ cognitive outcomes. This study also aims at examining the relationship between the dominant instructor scaffolding type and the student’s individual differences from three different perspectives of critical thinking assessment as evidence of students’ critical thinking levels. This kind of investigation could identify if there is any correlation between the student’s quality of postings exhibited in the AODF and the students’ performance in the subject-specific cognitive performance test and general critical thinking test.

II. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE According to [16] and social constructivism theory,

higher level thinking will be mostly appropriate to be generated through the medium of social interaction. Thus, Vygotsky’s social constructivism can be applied through the AODF medium. Critical thinking emerged and developed as a result of the interaction processes with the mindset of the expert critical thinker (instructor) in the form of a dialogue before it is formulated to be the self thought of the novice (student). Following the exponential interest in Vygotskian theory in recent decades, it has been increasingly accepted that instructors should try to help learners engage in thinking at higher levels through scaffolding [17]. Vygotsky emphasized that the full cognitive development requires social interaction through problem solving under adult supervision [18]. Furthermore, the importance of expert-novice communication in the students’ achievement is strongly emphasized in the social constructivism theory. It was also argued that higher mental functions such as critical thinking skills were generally used unconsciously by the novices and that such a procedure would only be suited to the critical thinking operations of experts, who can be expected to be conscious of the mental procedures that they employed.

III. RESEARCH QUESTIONS The present study extends the investigation of

relationship of students' critical thinking engagement, subject-specific and general critical thinking skills to instructor's scaffolding in the AODF environment. Thus, the following questions are addressed:

217217

1) What is the dominant type of instructor scaffolding received by each student in the AODF?

2) What is the effects of the instructor scaffolding type

on: a) Students’ critical thinking engagement in the

AODF? b) Students’ cognitive performance test? c) Students’ general critical thinking test?

3) How do students reach higher levels of critical

thinking engagement based on the patterns of instructor scaffolding type?

IV. RESEARCH DESIGN This study is an exploratory study which involves

qualitative and quantitative data collection. A quantitative approach with the combination of quantitative and qualitative data, specifically utilizing the one-group pre-test post-test design will be employed to collect, analyze and to triangulate the data in exploring relationships between instructor scaffolding type and students’ critical thinking skills. Data will be collected from multiple sources of instruments including AODF transcripts, performance test, standardized test, interviews, log data and observation checklists. Quantitative data from the performance test, standardized test, log data and observation checklists will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, inferential statistics and data mining technique while qualitative data from AODF transcripts and interview will be analyzed using content analysis to support the findings of quantitative data.

V. DATA COLLECTION This study will be carried out in ten weeks and

with the involvement of 38 undergraduate students enrolled in CD-ROM Based Multimedia Development course. Five problem-solving scenario tasks assessment for the online activity within the AODF platform in the Moodle LMS will be explicitly structured in the course outline. The problem-solving scenario tasks comprised of a set of discussion activities designed to provoke or motivate students to think critically in an attempt to develop an educational multimedia courseware. The instructor will assist them by scaffolding their thinking at the group and individual level.

The independent variable of this study is the instructor scaffolding types. The instructor scaffolding types refers to the four types of scaffolding (i.e., technical, procedural, content and metacognitive scaffolding) adopted from [19] TIOS tool in order to scaffold students learning during their engagement in the critical thinking problem-solving scenario task activities within the AODF environment.

The three dependent variables that will be evaluated in this study are the students’ critical thinking engagement in AODF based on Critical Thinking Coding Scheme Sheet (CTCSS) adapted from [20] model, students’

cognitive performance through Cognitive Performance Test (CPT) based on Bloom’s Taxonomy [21], and students’ general critical thinking based on Malaysian Critical Thinking Instrument (MaCTIv4) [22]. These three assessment techniques will be used in the assessment of students’ critical thinking skills.

For the qualitative data in this study, 10 students will be selected from the group to participate in a semi-structured interview using purposive sampling. In addition, log data from the Moodle LMS will be utilized to construct participation profiles in generating an understanding of students’ and instructor’s behavioral patterns, to examine the quantity and quality of the posts and to examine the process and the sequences of actions the instructor and students take in the process of participating in AODF that might lead to critical thinking engagement.

VI. DATA ANALYSIS The instructor’s postings will be coded by the

researchers guided by the content analysis sheet based on Tool for analyzing Instructor’s Online Scaffolding (TIOS) upon completion of the inter-rater reliability procedure. Using the descriptors and indicators in TIOS, the instructor’s postings will be coded into each of its four types of scaffolding (i.e., technical support, content support, procedural support, and metacognitive support). The same procedure will be conducted to analyze the students’ postings. Using the descriptors and indicators in [20] model, students’ postings will be coded into each of its four critical thinking engagement (i.e., clarification, assessment, inference, and strategy). The instructor’s and students’ qualitative postings from the AODF transcripts in a form of text data will be transformed into quantitative data in terms of the frequency of occurrence.

Nonlinear correlation coefficient (eta) will then be utilized to examine the inter-relationships between instructor scaffolding types and students’ critical thinking engagement. Descriptive analysis and paired-sample t-test will be employed on the pre-test and post-test of the cognitive performance test and the standardized before and after MaCTIv4 general critical thinking test. Point Biserial will then be utilized to examine the inter-relationships between instructor scaffolding type and students’ cognitive performance including general critical thinking. In addition, a paired-sample t-test will be administered to compare the significant differences between the pre-test and post-test including the before and after treatment.

MANOVA will further be conducted in order to answer whether the changes in the independent variable (i.e., instructor’s scaffolding types) have significant effects on the dependent variables (i.e., students’ critical thinking engagement, cognitive performance and general critical thinking) and what are the interactions among the dependent variables. Qualitative content analysis will be employed on the interview scripts and the researcher will record the themes identified including the frequencies of recurring themes. Additionally, quantitative data from the cognitive performance test, standardized test, log data and observation

218218

checklist will be analyzed using decision tree analysis by data mining.

VII. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The results of this study will clarify the

relationship between instructor’s scaffolding types towards students’ three different dimensions of critical thinking assessment. Thus, the findings of this research would suggest the dominant instructor’s scaffolding type that affects students critical thinking the most and work best for the particular critical thinking ability of students. This research is of significance to course designers, especially novice instructors including researchers in providing them guidelines for online scaffolding practice for the quality improvement of critical thinking, specifically in the AODF.

VIII. EXPECTED FINDINGS It is expected that instructor’s efforts to scaffold

students’ critical thinking in a problem-solving scenario task activities via AODF may help students to better understand the underlying structure of the CD-ROM Based Multimedia Development course and thus improve their achievement, decision making in developing an effective educational multimedia courseware and their general critical thinking ability. Moreover, the effective ways to scaffold students’ critical thinking engagement would be revealed which may later lead to the formulation of a framework as a recommendation for instructors to structure and scaffold students’ critical thinking in the text-based AODF environment effectively.

REFERENCES

[1] K. Bryceson, “The online learning environment—A new model using social constructivism and the concept of ‘Ba’ as a theoretical framework,” Learning Environments Research, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 189–206, Sep. 2007.

[2] J. Macdonald, Blended Learning and Online Tutoring Planning Learner Support and Activity Design, Second Edi. Gower Publishing Limited, 2008, p. 203.

[3] C. B. MacKnight, “Teaching Critical Thinking through Online Discussions,” Educause Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 38–41, 2000.

[4] S. A. Greenlaw and S. B. Deloach, “Teaching Critical Thinking with Electronic Discussion,” The Journal of Economic Education, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 36–52, 2003.

[5] S. Gerber, L. Scott, D. H. Clements, and J. Sarama, “Instructor influence on reasoned argument in discussion boards,” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 25–39, Jun. 2005.

[6] T. Anderson, L. Rourke, D. R. Garrison, and W. Archer, “Assessing Teaching Presence in a Computer Conferencing Context,” Distance Education, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1–17, 2001.

[7] L. Williams and M. Lahman, “Online Discussion, Student Engagement, and Critical Thinking,” Journal of Political Science Education, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 143–162, Apr. 2011.

[8] M. Abbas and M. Ahmad, “Soft Skills and the LMS: Perceptions and Patterns of Knowledge Management in the Learningcare Learning Management System for the Promotion of Soft Skills,” in Proceeding of the Conference on Teaching and Learning for Higher Education, UPM, 2007, pp. 78–97.

[9] S. M. Hosseini, “The application of SECI model as a framework of knowledge creation in virtual learning,” Asia Pacific Education Review, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 263–270, Dec. 2010.

[10] S. Nykvist, “Arguing online�: Expectations and realities of building knowledge in a blended learning environment,” Ph.D. dissertation, Centre of Learning Innovation, 2008.

[11] B. Rosesshine and C. Meister, “The Use of Scaffolds for Teaching Higher-Level Cognitive Strategies,” Educational Leadership, 1992.

[12] P. Sharma and M. Hannafin, “Learner perceptions of scaffolding in supporting critical thinking,” Journal of Computing in Higher Education, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 17–42, Sep. 2005.

[13] Y.-J. An, “Scaffolding Wiki-Based, Ill-Structured Problem Solving in an Online Environment,” MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 723–734, 2010.

[14] H.-L. Wu, “Scaffolding in Technology-Enhanced Science Education,” Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University, 2010.

[15] P. K. Gilbert and N. Dabbagh, “How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: a case study,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 5–18, Jan. 2005.

[16] L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.

[17] D. Moseley, V. Baumfield, J. Elliott, S. Higgins, J. Miller, D. P. Newton, and M. Gregson, Frameworks for Thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

[18] M. De Smet, H. Van Keer, B. De Wever, and M. Valcke, “Cross-age peer tutors in asynchronous discussion groups: Exploring the impact of three types of tutor training on patterns in tutor support and on tutor characteristics,” Computers & Education, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 1167–1181, May 2010.

[19] R. Reingold, R. Rimor, and A. Kalay, “Instructor’s scaffolding in support of student's metacognition through a teacher education online course: a case study,” Journal of interactive online learning, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 139–151, 2008.

[20] C. Perkins and E. Murphy, “Identifying and measuring individual engagement in critical thinking in online discussions: An exploratory case study,” Educational Technology & Society, vol. 9, pp. 298–307, 2006.

[21] B. S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York; Toronto: Longmans, Green, 1956.

[22] A. M. Mahdzir, “Penerokaan Ciri-Ciri Psikometrik Instrumen Pentaksiran Pemikiran Kritis Malaysia (IPPKM) Dan Model Pemikiran Kritis Malaysia,” Ph.D. dissertation, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 2009.

219219